The problem with the gun laws is that they are just that... Laws...

so they effect the people who obey them. Law abiding, responsible gun owners are the ones who feel the burden. Meanwhile the people who simply disregard them are free to do as they will. So essentially you are disarming the people (or making it more difficult) for them to posses fire arms and another means to defend themselves, while making it easier for the wolves to move freely.

Yes violent crime has started to go down (thanks to a stronger and more visable police force, as well as new and improved civil control tactics), but GUN related violent crime has not. It has remained constant even throughout the decades of restrictive gun legislation. My thought process is that history and statistics show that WSith or without restrictive gun laws, criminals who wish to arm themselves can do so easily. Look to the U.K for example. It is the worlds largest "Gun free" zone, yet they still have as many gun related crimes per capita as any other similar nation. Now you compare the U.K to a state with relaxed gun laws and concealed carry permits like Texas, Utah, or Vermont, and you have a very drastic decrease in gun related crimes per capita. The reason isnt that Criminals are unarmed, its that the possible victim MAY BE armed(edited). There is a direct correlation I believe.

GC! Draw up some legislation and lets start getting some traction on this! GC for Mayor 🙂

Buggie,

Interesting points.

How about this as a possible criteria to be authorized for concealed carry........

Maybe, just maybe a total revamp of the defence of Canada. With a renewed emphasis on national defence starting in the community. The model in my mind would be similar to the Swiss Civil Defence Force.
(Arnt swiss citizens mandated to serve 2 years in the armed forces, similar to Israel? correct me if Im wrong please. I will fact check as well)

Buggie. I am not an expert of the Swiss Defence plans, but according to Wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_Switzerland )
male citizens are screened for service after their 18th birthday, females are allowed to volunteer their service.

Basic training of all able bodied citizens for the defence of their town, village or MD. Training would include disaster response as well as local military defence.
(a good notion... however I dont think every able bodied person would a) have the time, b) feel the need, c) feel they have that responsibility. Perhaps more along the lines of a voluntary enrolment?

Yes, voluntary service. If you want to have concealed carry, you can volunteer to serve as a member of your local civil defence unit. Our military history has been very successful with those who have volunteered their service. Like I suggested a total revamp of the reserve miltary system would be needed, so there is cooperation with corporate world, the CF, local government and the citizens. For this to work, it would need a huge support from grassroot, everyday Canadians.

Each qualified citizen would be issued a suitable firearm and ammo to be stored in their home, so they are ready to respond to a disaster or crisis in a moments notice. (what would you suggest as the necessary qualifications? generalized answer obviously lol)

Hmmmmm, where to start......okay, First Aid - minimum Standard First Aid with CPR and AED; GMT - General Military Training (just like the reserves or the Cdn Rangers); Pass the CF Shoot-to-live program; CER - Civil Emergency Response; Basic Search & Rescue; Basic Comms - radio operator; Land Navigation - compass & GPS; Basic Fire Suppression and Basic Section Battle Drills. That would be a good starting point. Of course, being part of the CF there would be opportunities to get other courses.

As for weapon and ammo, it seems to work well for the Swiss, to have every active duty member retain both at the persons residence. The Canadian Rangers seem to have similar success. As for which weapon system, that is putting the cart before the horse. It would probably be a weapons platform that would normally be headed for war stores. So, if the C7 family was to be replaced by say the FN SCAR platform, then the SCAR's would go to the first line units, the newest C7/C8's would go to the primary reserves and the first generation C7's may go to the civil defence. That is just an example of course. The Canadian Rangers still use the Lee Enfield #4 Mk2 rifles from Korea. They still work and function in all weather, climate conditions.

Criminal records check. As frequently or randomly as required.
(agreed. sporatic intervels would be the best I think)

Annual skills training and qualifying. Including local, district and regional exercises.
(what would you suggest for this? something along the lines of military drill? or active shooter training? scenario based exercises?)

Exercise, as in military exercise. A combination of unit tactics, range time, medical refresher, navigation, survival, CER refresher and hands-on practice, and force-on-force training. The first few days would be refresher training by station. The end would be a multiday scenario to test skills, leadership and teamwork. Not so much a pass or fail, more like ensuring every member gets the experience in a controlled environment.

As this group would be an arm of the Canadian Forces, similar to the Canadian Ranger Patrol Group, licensing of firearms would not be necessary as long as members where in good standing with their unit.

Once, all of these requirements have been satisfied, then and only then would concealed carry permits be issued.

This process would ensure quality training, community minded, non-criminals would be carrying and able to assist fellow citizens or other law enforcement members if they happen to be at the wrong place at the wrong time and become involved in a criminal incident.
(I would also like to add that psychological clearances be added as well... also stipulations regarding substance abuse, as well as a zero tolerance to alcohol and drug stipulation. If a person plans on having a single drink, leave the sidearm at home.)

I think I understand where you are coming from. But whom would conduct the psych evaluations?? And what exactly are we trying to screen out?? Or screen in?? As for alcohol use, I was there at the end of the old army, I do not see this as a black and white issue. Alcohol abuse and drug use I agree, they can be randomly tested for and corrective education can take place. If persons act responsibly, and know their limits and behave within those limits; I see some room for flexibility in alcohol use. I was there when zero tolerance was instituted, it did not work well. But that was just my observations.

Just a possible solution. Might work, if given a chance????

Mountainman.

Please read my comments within the quotation.

I like this idea very much. Perhaps you could expand on it some more? and what do the rest of you feel about something like this? GC if you could find some more information on the swiss model, I would be very interested in seeing it. I will check out google university to see what info I can find in the mean time.

I will have to reply in more detail later.

Cheers,

Mountainman.

In regards to drugs and alcohol, I meant more along the lines of "if your going to drink, don't beig your gun"... Sort of like dont drink and drive.

Well one thing is for sure " buggie' you get an ' A ' for getting a good discusion going and "gc " you get an A plus for your ideas and input.....If we ever have to bug out together it wont be boring in the camp.....lol....

The Germans have the conscript, my former brother in-law is a tank driver when there is a call up, 2 weeks of every year he go's in for re-training. My Son who is a German national, would have also been conscripted had he not been diagnosed as ADD like his dear old dad. The Germans have a slim choice, in these matters, if you don't want to be in the military, than you have to become a firefighter or a medic.
This is true with most of the Euro countries. Unlike what the Swiss use to do, the Euro's don't keep there weapons with them, but every rally point is within 1 hr. traveling distance by car, and that is where their weapons and ammo is stored.

I like the thought process going on... but this has grown drastically from what I was originally talking about haha.

I'm a little late to this party, but here's my take...

1. definitely implement stronger castle laws.

2. no to concealed carry. it seems to me that you're trying to solve the wrong problem. don't put more guns on the street, take away those that are already there by changing the laws to take away all wiggle room when using a gun when committing a crime. Implement HARSH minimum sentences to all crimes involving guns.

I'm a little late to this party, but here's my take...

1. definitely implement stronger castle laws.

I have no problem with this.

2. no to concealed carry. it seems to me that you're trying to solve the wrong problem. don't put more guns on the street, take away those that are already there by changing the laws to take away all wiggle room when using a gun when committing a crime. Implement HARSH minimum sentences to all crimes involving guns.

It's never how many guns "on the street" that is the problem, it's who has those guns. A criminal intent upon committing a crime will disregard any law against having said gun on the street. When polled by criminologists, convicts overwhelmingly indicated their greatest fear is an armed private citizen.

-S.

Like a lot of others on this Forum I read pretty much all the posts, and only jump in once and while. This conversation is outstanding… helping us all re-adjust our own opinions a little one way or the other. Like Traveller said bugging out won’t be boring if your with people who can think… nice to see so many men with brains and brawn… LOL!

How about this:

1) Clear and descisive Castle Laws. A Person should have the right to defend themselves, their loved ones, and their property with whatever means necesary. If you are home when a person breaks in, how are you supposed to know that they are only there for your Laptop, watches, and Cash. Everyone should understand that if it is not your home, you are not allowed inside it unless specifically invited inside by the resident. Any one else should be considered hostile.

2) Concealed carry permits. In order to be eligable for a concealed carry permit, you must meet certain qualifications such as minimum age, eye exam, psychological examination, criminal background check, fire arm safety courses, firearm tactical certification courses, PAL and RPAL certification, etc. These exams should be held annually at the bare minimum, and be reasonably priced or subsidized by the government.

3) Harsh criminal penalties for anyone convicted of commiting a crime with a fire arm, and an even more serious penalties if using an un-registered or illigaly owned fire arm.

4) A Swiss style civil defence force made up of volunteers that meet bi-monthly for a weekend tactical training scenario. Members of this wing of the military will be equipt with government issued fire arms and ammunition, and must pass even more in depth training and medical exams. Would be a paid-on call position, where you volunteer for the position, but get paid while out on drill or when deployed.

We already have an elaborate system in place for firearms ownership and operation in Canada. I put together my "laymans" understanding of the road to firearms ownership with where the additional concealed carry permit would fit in. I don't know if this chart is accurate for everyone, but it's what I saw going through the process.

Transporting Firearms Safely

Non-restricted firearms must be unloaded during transportation.

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/fs-fd/storage-entreposage-eng.htm

Have to admit I was ignorant of these non-existent regulations, especially no need to have a trigger lock.

These the ONLY rules that must be followed when transporting non-restricted firearms. There is NOTHING that says one can't transport on foot. The only reason that we don't do this is fear of what MAY happen if seen.

I think we should NORMALIZE this practice with organized gatherings.

there are municipal bylaws that prevent law abiding citizens from walking around with a fire arm, at least in calgary.

I've gone through the Calgary bylaws and can't find any regulations regarding transport. The only regulations mentioned pertain to discharge.

Last summer I returned my neighbour's sks after he let me borrow it for a weekend at the range.

He had just pulled into his garage and was just unloading groceries. He jumped and then laughed as I walked up his driveway with the sks on my shoulder after carrying down the sidewalk the short distance to his place... but we're in a new development in a country hamlet. I'm not sure anyone would have noticed even if they had driven by or looked out their front window 😮